Thursday, October 30, 2014

Towards Revolution: Townshend Act

Previously, the two new tax
schemes of England had brought opposition and arguments in the Thirteen
Colonies in North America. The Sugar act led to widespread smuggling and
arguments on the powers of the Parliament in London in enact laws in the colonies.
Meanwhile, the Stamp Act brought wave of opposition on a higher scale. Numerous
sectors, from intellectuals to religious groups, had voiced their anger over
the new tax. The opposition was so strong that in 1766, the Stamp act was repealed.
But England was not yet finish. In 1767, in order to increase their revenues,
Charles Townshend, implemented a new wave of taxes that would once again engulf
the Thirteen Colonies.

Great Britain was in a dire
situation during the decade of 1760’s. The French and Indian War had brought
huge debts to the Kingdom. Moreover, its massive empire in the Americas caused
a lot to be maintained and kept. Prime Ministers of Great Britain attempted to
alleviate debt by collecting new sources of revenue. And their sights was aimed
towards the Thirteen Colonies, which virtually, paid no direct taxes to
Britain.

The Sugar and Stamp Act were
the early ill-attempts of Britain to tax the colonies. But when the two tax
acts were implemented, furious and violent opposition in both the streets and
the legislatures became intense. Protests groups formed and showed opposition
to the taxes. Legislators from different colonies argued about the rights of
the Parliament in London to tax colonies which were not actually and really represented
in the body. Eventually, in March 1766, the Stamp Act was repealed and the
Sugar Tax was reformed.

In 1766, a new government
took power. Only months in power, Lord Rockingham, the Prime Minister
responsible for the repeal of the Stamp Act, lose the faith of his majesty King
George III. He was replaced by a veteran but aging statesman, William Pitt the
Elder. Pitt’s involvement in governance became seldom due to his age. Much of
the state of affairs fell to the shoulders of his Chancellor of Exchequer,
Charles Townshend. In 1767, Townshend saw the need to impose new taxes to the
colonies.

Townshend knew the issues of
the taxing the colonies. He was aware that external taxes, which concerns trade
with other countries, would receive opposition from the colonials. He then
decided to impose internal taxes, which impose due to items imported from
England itself. He then issued an act which placed taxes over luxury and necessity
good that were imported by the colonies from England. Tariffs were imposed in
glass, paint, paper, and lead products. He also imposed 3 penny taxes on tea.

Enforcement of the new taxes
were more intense than before. Customs board, directly appointed by Townshend
would enforce the law. They could issue general warrants or writ of assistance
to inspect cargo ships. Due process of captured smugglers were once again
placed under vice-admiralty courts, with the judges given the power to
sentence, rather than regular courts, with juries giving the sentences. To
answer the issues of distance and cost for having lawsuits filed from Nova
Scotia from the past taxes, new vice-admiralty courts were established in major
ports of Boston, Charleston, and Philadelphia. In order to protect customs
officials from any harassment by the colonials, the Parliament also passed the
Quartering Act, which provided lodgings for red coats that would be deployed in
the ports of the colonies.

In order to maintain efficiency
of the customs officials, a scheme of commission was set. Custom board
officials would get their salary from the fines of convicted smugglers. They would
also receive one-third of the confiscated cargo.

When the news of the new
taxes reached the Thirteen Colonies, the response was immediate and furious. In
newspapers, numerous columnist voice opposition. Among them was Josiah Quincy.
Quincy voiced his distaste of the Quartering Act, which provided that locals
should provide the food and lodgings of British troops. He quoted: “Is not the
bread taken out of children’s mouth and unto the dogs?” Others showed their
furry into other forms. In December of 1767, John Dickinson wrote a pamphlet
titles, Letters from a Farmer in Pennsylvania. On his pamphlet he argued that any form of
taxation by London was an act of enslavement. Protest movements that flared up
during the Stamp returned. Boycott movements returned. Because the Townshend
Act placed taxes on British goods imported to the colonies, vocal leaders, like
Samuel Adams, urged for a boycott of these goods. Businessmen and artisans, who
could profit from the import-substitution, ensuing from the boycott, welcomed
the movement. The famous protest movement Sons of Liberty also resurfaced in
1768 to challenge the Townshend Act. In
addition, a new organization appeared against the Townshend Act and would serve
as the female counterpart of the Sons of Liberty – the Daughters of Liberty.

The Daughters of Liberty was
an organization that embodied the opposition of women to the Townshend Act. Composed
of housewife from all walks of life, it supported the movement of boycott of
British textiles and import substitution. The Daughters of Liberty urged women to
make their own clothes from scratch, rather than import textile products from
England. They had spinning bee events were women publicly spin thread and yarn
together. In 1770, the Daughters of Liberty elevated their boycott by not just
boycotting textile but also tea from Britain.

Besides protests, smuggling
became widespread and became almost a heroic act for many colonials. The Sons
of Liberty supported brave smugglers who defied the British customs officials. Among
the most revered smugglers was the John Hancock, who later became part of the
Continental Congress. Hancock rose in popularity by smuggling French and Spanish
goods to Boston. It provided the goods that the city needed and it was cheaper
because it paid less taxes to the authorities. However, the British authorities
took notice of Hancock and decided to act. In June of 1768, the British ceased
one of Hancock’s ship, the Liberty. Hudson was sued by the authorities for
smuggling. But the action caused outrage from the public. But for unexplained
reason, the charges were drop later on.

Other than the charges
brought against Hancock, Boston was shook by political upheaval. On February of
1768, Samuel Adams filed a circular against the Townshend Act in the colony legislature.
Governor Francis Bernard was able to persuade most of the legislators. However,
after the elections, new anti-Townshend Act legislators were elected to the
legislature. And under the new legislature, the circular was passed. But then
Governor Bernard received support from the secretary of colonial affairs, lord
Hillsborough to repeal the circular letter. The motion to repeal in the Massachusetts
legislature failed overwhelmingly. 92 vote against the repeal and 7 for the
repeal. As a result, Governor Bernard, with the support of Hillsborough
dissolved the legislature. Knowing the possible public outcry and riot that
would follow, 4,000 red coats were sent into Boston to secure peace and order.

Two years later, however,
this presence of British troop became a focal point that would ignite anger
throughout the Thirteen Colonies. At the night of March 5, 1770, a contingent
of British troops under Captain Thomas Preston was in charge of guarding the
Boston customs house. A mob, in discontent of the taxes and the presence of
British troops threw snowballs against the British soldiers. It then led to
taunting and with one unknown shot, a whole contingent of British troops opened
fired against the mob. It led to the death of five and wounded eight other civilians.
The so-called Boston Massacre was forever immortalized by the depiction of the
famous journalist, Paul Revere. The news of the killings spread like wild fire
throughout the Thirteen Colonies.

While the Boston Massacre occurred
in Boston, across the Atlantic, Great Britain underwent political change once
again. The leading figures that pushed for the Townshend Act were dead. Charles
Townshend had died in 1767. A year later, William Pitt also passed away. In 1770,
a new Prime Minister was in power, Frederick Lord North. When he came to
office, Great Britain faced recession. The boycott on textile, a major export of Great Britain, harmed the economy. In order to prevent a total economic disaster, on March 5, a motion
for repeal was filed by Prime Minister North. A month later, the repeal was
passed. The Townshend Act along with the loathed Quartering Act were repealed.
However, a part of the Townshend Act was maintained. Revenue on tea were huge -
£20,000 annually. This part of the Townshend Act was maintained. Nevertheless,
the colonials managed to score another victory against the British Parliament
in London.The Townshend Act was a
disaster for the British. It further angered the colonies, which led to
dissatisfaction towards the British authorities. The infamous legacy of the
act, the Boston Massacre, caused outcry and opened the eyes of many colonials
to the “brutality” of the British authorities. The Townshend Act only managed
to further drive the Thirteen Colonies towards the direction of revolution for
liberty and independence. See also:Stamp ActSugar ActTea Act

Bibliography:Berkin, C. Making America: A History of the United States. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1995.Boyer, P. et. al. The Enduring Vision: A History of the American People. Boston: Wadsworth/Cengage Learning, 2010.Brooks, R. An American History. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1985.